February 27, 2007

Chuck Hagel on Viet-raq... Revelation Included!

Chuck Hagel (R-For Now, 96%) hints that he may want to run with a Democrat on the Unity08 ticket (oh sure, I've heard of them!). One presumes that Hagel wants to sufficiently damage the Republican nominee -- whoever he may be -- that the Democrats win; then he can say "if only they had listened to me."

That should tell us just about everything we need to know about Chuck "Swift Surrender" Hagel:

Hagel joked during the interview about teaming up with New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, a moderate Republican, and also floated the possibility of joining a bipartisan unity ticket with a Democrat -- with his name first, of course.

Hagel clearly admires Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and calls him "a star," but he doubts the two could ever team up given the vast difference in their parties' principles. "I don't know if it gets to that point, but there is a shift going on out there, and there's nothing like a war that does that," Hagel said.

That was a month ago. A few days later, he made a tepid denial of the possibility in a recent "hagelographic" Newsweek profile (the February 5th issue), calling the possibility "ludicrous" (page 4) -- but not stating categorically that he would not go for it anyway if his quest for the Republican nomination appeared hopeless.

Before this climax, however, some unintended insight breaks through on pages 2-3, as the Hagel brothers (Chuck and Tom) discuss their Vietnam experiences:

Chuck and Tom were both sent to Vietnam.... It was 1968, America's bloodiest year in the war, and on the ground the brothers were hardened by a grisly conflict they tried not to think of as futile. "You see it today in Iraq," says Tom. "We go in, kill all these insurgents, lose all those people. Then we leave town and they just move back in. Same damn thing we did every day over there."

[Chuck Hagel] recalls making a vow to himself: "If America were to go to war again and I was in a position to influence things, I would do everything I could to understand the reality and not allow another Vietnam to occur."

I think we have finally found what makes Chuck Hagel tick like a time bomb about the Iraq war: He and his brother hated their time in Vietnam and came to see it as utterly futile (Tom immediately, Chuck some time later). So today, perhaps in cosmic expiation of their sins, they simply matte "Vietnam" over "Iraq" and react accordingly.

What need have they to investigate what is actually happening in Iraq? Why bother following our evolving tactics -- or how we now hold the towns and cities we take, denying the terrorists easy return? And what's the point of seeing how different Iraq is from Vietnam?

Even more basic, this simplistic identification means Hagel has neither the need nor the desire to honestly consider the argument that Vietnam was voluntary but Iraq is mandatory. He has his one-to-one mapping of Vietnam onto Iraq. And since the first was an exercise in futility, surely the second must be just the same! Thus the obsessive desire to stop the war at any cost.

I am neither psychologist nor psychiatrist... and in my inexpert and uninformed opinion, Sen. Chuck Hagel is not a rational man when it comes to the war: He suffers from the delusion that history is repeating itself exactly all over again; and like a bad Outer Limits episode, Hagel is determined to change history this time.

He is demented about the most important issue facing America today... not a good characteristic in a powerful senator. Earth to Nebraska: Do you think it might be time to start recruiting candidates for a primary fight -- even if Hagel runs for reelection to the Senate at the same time as he runs for president?

Hatched by Dafydd on this day, February 27, 2007, at the time of 5:24 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/1835

Comments

The following hissed in response by: charlotte

Good points all, Daffyd. To me, Hagel, a few Republicans, and most Democrats are 'Namocrats. They lived through VietNam and not during the wars found in history books and cinematic productions; ‘Nam and anti-war and are all they know personally. They are that part of the Me generation (Don’t trust anyone over 30) that never developed an affinity for the past beyond its own heady days, nor for the long-term, the big picture or for the far future. They are time and space impaired parochials and cause-and-effect muddled thinkers. They know and emote one thing- their ‘Nam experience- but haven’t bothered to study that war well enough to apply its lessons properly. Their subjective perspective overcomes more rational analysis perhaps because, as ‘Nam soldiers or protestors, they were traumatized or galvanized, their identities, politics and idea of our country permanently forged in a few frustrating years that were, of course, the only years that count. History is all about them.

Even Hagel & some less myopic Dems have to realize that, like Communism, Islamism is a totalitarian aggressive movement that threatens the US and western way of life. And that it can’t be defeated by an arms race, its proponents deterred from attacking the US directly by MAD, or that cold war containment stratagems would hold violent Islamism at bay. And, surely, they haven’t forgotten 9-11 and other terrorist attacks on us and the West.

So, what are their answers? It’s beginning to look as if the ‘Namocrats want to see America decline as a superpower in the hopes that our chastening would make us less of a target and more egalitarian in the community of nations. It looks as if they sympathize more with insurgents and anti-American protestors everywhere who would bring us down, because, in their eyes, we were once ‘Nam killers and imperialists. It looks as if ‘Namocrats believe we are still killers and imperialists wherever we deploy troops, and that it falls to them to “protect” our troops from having to do an arrogant America’s evil bidding. It looks as if they believe the US at least should not and maybe even cannot decisively win a war, anymore, and that, at any rate, military efforts should be perfectly executed, humane, and not last longer than a football season or two. They seem to think conflict-ending negotiations should give it all away to our noble enemies, a la 'Nam, and that any killing en masse subsequent to our premature withdrawal isn't our problem (but, oh, we need to stop the genocide in Darfur.)

Finally, it looks as if ‘Namocrats are never going to grow up and out of their rebellious puerile perspectives, and that we’re stuck with their antipathy, obstruction, illogic and denial until some terrorist reality up close and personal blows them away. How incredibly sad. So many people doing the wrong thing and causing more grief for others, out of a sense of persistently ignorant history and self-referential morality. Or maybe it was too many bong hits.

The above hissed in response by: charlotte at February 27, 2007 8:12 AM

Hagel is psychotic if he thinks he actually has a national following.
He is a fool, a tool and a poultroon.
I would vote for Hillary before I would vote for hagel. At least with Hillary you know where you stand.
Hagel is an extreme version of McCain.
maybe he can get some psychiatric meds to deal with his problem?

The above hissed in response by: hunter at February 27, 2007 11:51 AM

The following hissed in response by: Navyvet

The irony is thick here.

The outcome of the Vietnam war was the result of a number of mistakes by the U.S. These included a loss of political will to win. Now comes Hagel and his crew determined to avoid a repeat of Vietnam by doing precisely what caused the loss of Vietnam.

And the truly sad thing is that they cannot see how their very actions are undermining our efforts at victory.

It is fortunate that today's politicians were not in office during World War II. After Pearl Harbor, the massacre at Wake Island, and the loss of the Philippines, they would have been offering surrender terms to the Japanese since it would have been obvious the war was lost and we must "bring our troops home" from Hawaii.

Should congress be successful in bringing about a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, this country will be in for many dark years which will make our Iraq experience appear as a picnic in the park.

The above hissed in response by: Navyvet at February 27, 2007 3:17 PM

The following hissed in response by: Troll

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing...

Hagel is an extreme version of McCain.

He's been jealous of the attention McCain has gotten all these years and now that McInsane is running for President he's going to crowd in for some Maverick Media love.

The above hissed in response by: Troll at February 27, 2007 8:57 PM

The following hissed in response by: MarkD

Simply delusional. Who will vote for a pseudo-Dem when you cna have the real thing?

The real Dems will remind voters that Perot allowed Clinton to become president by splitting the Repub vote, and the Hagel-Bloomberg ticket will get about 147 votes nationally. Maybe a few more if there are butterfly ballots in play, or if the candidates have large families.

The above hissed in response by: MarkD at February 28, 2007 2:39 PM

The following hissed in response by: Dick E

Navyvet-

Yeah. And remember all the talk about exit strategies during WWII?

The above hissed in response by: Dick E at February 28, 2007 5:32 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for hissing in,
.
Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)

Powerhouses

Milblogs

Bear Flag League

The Bear Flag League blogroll will resume when BFL switches from BlogRolling to some other link-management site that does not trigger "malware" security alerts. We apologize for the inconvenience, but, well, you know.